So they found a correlation between the decline of Arctic sea ice and snowy winters. Great.
I dunno. Is it?

George - 06 March 2012 07:05 AM

This is what we know: GW is a fact; AGW is probably true; we don’t know if GW has an effect on the shifting of jet streams. But people like to yap. So be it.

What do you mean “is probably”? Got a percentage?
George it is much more than just yapping.
It’s a real thing that’s going on whether we are present to it or not.

CO2 concentrations are distributed throughout the atmosphere,
they are increasing thus they are warming the entire medium {well actually the upper atmosphere is cooling because some extra heat is being held in moister regions of the atmosphere and not escaping upward}.

Also if we recall that our weather/climate can be considered one gigantic heat-engine who’s role is to distribute moisture, barometric/heat gradients and temperature differentials and considering the jet stream is a major distribution mechanism within that atmosphere… then it stands that it is impossible to isolate the jet stream as independent of current cascading AGW events.

The jet stream is the jet stream and will always be there.
The way it manifests itself and flows through the global atmospheric ocean, that is very much modulated by atmosperic/oceanic and landmass influences.
Open ocean water where there used to be snowfields,
circulating ocean water becoming radiant heat absorbers,
ocean water salinity freshening because of melting snowfields and glacier, etc.
that stuff influences convective circulation patterns in the atmosphere. All that is of one organism. Feeding heat into the atmosphere where the jet stream whips it around.

For instance a couple years back when the US East Coast was getting pummeled with cold and snow, you could follow the unusually convoluted jet stream back to arctic regions that were suffering an incredible regional heat wave. So basically the jet stream was sucking cold out of northern regions and mixing in warmer air from southerly regions… while America’s East Coast and Europe was offering up its warm air while absorbing all that cold air that was sent south with the aid of the jet stream.

Thus global warming spreads throughout the system,
even though it seemed unseasonably cold and snowy in one specific region.
=========
Here are some interesting related articles:

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/16feb_deepfreeze/Europe Hammered by Winter, Is North America Next?
Feb 16, 2012: For the first half of this year’s winter, the big news was warm temperatures and lack of snow. Ski resorts were covered in bare dirt, while January temperatures in southern California topped July highs.
Then, out of the blue, Europe got clobbered: Over the past two weeks, temperatures in Eastern Europe have nose-dived to -30 degrees Celsius (-22 degrees Fahrenheit). Blizzards and the bone-chilling cold have resulted in the deaths of over 550 people so far, with rooftop-high snow drifts trapping tens of thousands of villagers in their homes and cutting off access to entire towns. It has even snowed as far south as North Africa.

Scientists are monitoring a massive pool of fresh water in the Arctic Ocean that could spill into the Atlantic and potentially alter the ocean currents that bring Western Europe its moderate climate. The oceanographers said Tuesday April 5, 2011, the unusual accumulation has been caused by Siberian and Canadian rivers dumping more water into the Arctic, and from melting sea ice. Both are consequences of global warming.

So they found a correlation between the decline of Arctic sea ice and snowy winters. Great.
I dunno. Is it?

George - 06 March 2012 07:05 AM

This is what we know: GW is a fact; AGW is probably true; we don’t know if GW has an effect on the shifting of jet streams. But people like to yap. So be it.

Even though they aren’t my words, it’s obvious on first glance that you have not been at all scrupulous about quoting, and have both out of collation remarks and a mis-attributed remark presented in bundles here. Certainly it is not going to be a positive feature that enhances the relevance or clarity of George’s opinions, when you have him talking to himself at cross-purposes, apparently.

True, but GW is especially damaging in the colder polar regions and the marginal climates of the tropics. One can cite that draughts around the world have increased. The GW brings with it climate change, thus it is to be expected that weather patterns are shifting as well as causing the current migration of animals and fauna.

From what I read, the weather phenomenon known as the Artic Oscallian is due to the shifting of the jet stream. It has nothing to do with GW.

Okay, CC, let me rephrase it: the scientists know with a near certainty that GW is happening and the data seems to indicate that it is caused by us. Although some scientists suspect that GW could be affecting the jet stream, they don’t have any conclusive evience to show that this is in fact happening. And don’t waste your time trying to tell me how you think GW may be related to the shifting of the jet stream because I am not going to read it.

I thought I could live with GW because I’m high enough above sea level and the climate near the ocean is quite temperate. However, I’m getting really annoyed because it’s not just GW; it’s GCC, global climate change, and I’m getting tired of having to wear a sweater, a jacket, and occasionally long underwear pants when I go outside on Southern California mornings.

I don’t know what’s causing the arctic jet stream to bend down here, but I don’t like it, GW, GCC or not.

The map on post #1 is very interesting. Am I detecting that the jet stream tries to follow open ocean? It seems that the stream tends to follow coast lines, i.e. changes direction when it encounters firm land. Perhaps the heat generated by high population areas and the natural heat of land in the tropical regions pushes the jet stream off course and forces it to follow the more stable (cooler) heat patterns of the open waters.

And notice that it dips far south at longitude 120 W. Unfortunately it’s been dipping farther and farther south so it’s no longer just freezing the tail off of San Franciscans, it’s getting us in Los Angeles.

I’m determined to blame something and global climate change is as good a scapegoat as anything.

Okay, CC, let me rephrase it: the scientists know with a near certainty that GW is happening and the data seems to indicate that it is caused by us. Although some scientists suspect that GW could be affecting the jet stream, they don’t have any conclusive evience to show that this is in fact happening. And don’t waste your time trying to tell me how you think GW may be related to the shifting of the jet stream because I am not going to read it.

holly horse poop george, I thought this was a discussion board. Jeez, I get kicked when I link to more authoritive sources and I get kicked when I directly explain my state of understanding… guess that’s why it’s good I learned not to have a thin skin long ago.

Guess the point I was trying to make was that it’s misleading to try to treat the Jet Stream as some independent feature. Because it is intimately linked to features and dynamics that are being measurably alteredby the cascading effects of Anthropogenic Global Warming… caused by excessive amounts of society produced “greenhouse” gases being injected into our atmosphere.

PS. excuse me for misquoting up there, happens when I’m rushing. Besides, I simply used your quotes as an intro for writing about some Jet Stream basics…which is also why I started a new thread since I saw it as separate from topic I copped them from.

And maybe I should add that I was originally disagreeing with Write4U who was using weather as an evidence for GW (based on his experience of looking out of window and seeing his snowman to melt, or something like that). If you want to speculate how GW may be affecting the jet stream, I don’t really mind. I actually like it when people don’t sound like Data or Wikipedia all the time and are not afraid to indulge in conjectural thought (I copied that from a dictionary).

Maybe this is a good time to once again remember Sagan’s words of wisdom: “We will not be afraid to speculate, but we will be careful to distinguish speculation from fact.”

And maybe I should add that I was originally disagreeing with Write4U who was using weather as an evidence for GW (based on his experience of looking out of window and seeing his snowman to melt, or something like that). If you want to speculate how GW may be affecting the jet stream, I don’t really mind. I actually like it when people don’t sound like Data or Wikipedia all the time and are not afraid to indulge in conjectural thought (I copied that from a dictionary).

Maybe this is a good time to once again remember Sagan’s words of wisdom: “We will not be afraid to speculate, but we will be careful to distinguish speculation from fact.”

George I don’t get your cavalier attitude.
It goes beyond common sense… jeez the conclusion to your approach is - that nothing can ever be known about anything.
And that’s what’s so despicable about the head games so many of the noble skeptic/contrarians play. It’s all about raising parlar-debate questions and confusion, not about a concerted good faith effort to learn from what we can know.
Since all serious Earth Science students agree that nothing can ever be known 100%, doesn’t mean we can’t draw solid conclusions from what we can/do know.
~ ~ ~

Regarding your apparent cynicism that the Jet Stream’s behavior is intimately linked to AGW dynamics here’s what some of the big boys and girls have discovered. Although perhaps you’d take exception to how I described your perceived attitude… but what can i say, that is what it’s starting to sound like over here.

Stanford, CA—The Earth’s jet streams,
the high-altitude bands of fast winds that strongly influence the paths of storms and other weather systems,
are shifting—possibly in response to global warming.

Scientists at the Carnegie Institution determined that over a 23-year span
from 1979 to 2001 the jet streams in both hemispheres have risen in altitude and shifted toward the poles.
The jet stream in the northern hemisphere has also weakened.

These changes fit the predictions of global warming models and have implications for the
frequency and intensity of future storms, including hurricanes.

The results are published in the April 18 Geophysical Research Letters.

Two talks at a scientific conference this week will propose a common root for an enormous deluge in western Tennessee in May 2010, and a historic outbreak of tornadoes centered on Alabama in April 2011.
Both events seem to be linked to a relatively rare coupling between the polar and the subtropical jet streams, says Jonathan Martin, a University of Wisconsin-Madison professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences.

The loss of Arctic summer sea ice and the rapid warming of the Far North are altering the jet stream over North America, Europe, and Russia. Scientists are now just beginning to understand how these profound shifts may be increasing the likelihood of more persistent and extreme weather.
BY JENNIFER FRANCIS
(research professor at the Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences at Rutgers University,)

Does it seem as though your weather has become increasingly “stuck” lately? Day after day of cold, rain, heat, or blue skies may not be a figment of your imagination. While various oceanic and atmospheric patterns such as El Niño, La Niña, and the North Atlantic Oscillation have been blamed for the spate of unusual weather recently, there’s now a new culprit in the wind: Arctic amplification. Directly related to sea-ice loss and earlier snowmelt in the Far North, it is affecting the jet stream around the Northern Hemisphere, with potentially far-reaching effects on the weather.

And maybe I should add that I was originally disagreeing with Write4U who was using weather as an evidence for GW (based on his experience of looking out of window and seeing his snowman to melt, or something like that). If you want to speculate how GW may be affecting the jet stream, I don’t really mind. I actually like it when people don’t sound like Data or Wikipedia all the time and are not afraid to indulge in conjectural thought (I copied that from a dictionary).

Maybe this is a good time to once again remember Sagan’s words of wisdom: “We will not be afraid to speculate, but we will be careful to distinguish speculation from fact.”

No George, I was not using weather as evidence of GW. I was responding to a previous post by FrenchCurve in another thread “Climate change killing mighty trees in Alaska” (see post #10), where he quoted a scientist’s musing,

FrenchCurve,
This statement is odd enough to warrant a second look:

“I’m looking out my window and we have a dusting of snow at best,” Schaberg said from his Vermont office. “And the soils are frozen all over the place, which is not the norm at all. So even just this one component of changing climate — reduced snow packs…i

This scientist expects that by looking out his window in Vermont, and if he sees there is only a dusting of snow today, it means….

And maybe I should add that I was originally disagreeing with Write4U who was using weather as an evidence for GW (based on his experience of looking out of window and seeing his snowman to melt, or something like that). If you want to speculate how GW may be affecting the jet stream, I don’t really mind. I actually like it when people don’t sound like Data or Wikipedia all the time and are not afraid to indulge in conjectural thought (I copied that from a dictionary).

Maybe this is a good time to once again remember Sagan’s words of wisdom: “We will not be afraid to speculate, but we will be careful to distinguish speculation from fact.”

good on ya, George.

And that is false FrenchCurve.
Nowhere have I said that weather in a specific area as proof of climate change or GW. I did note somewhere else that living in No.Idaho there has been a marked change in our winters (reduced snowfall) in the past twenty years, which has affected spring run-off to the detriment of the farmers. I did also mention that in past 10 years where I live we have experienced much less snowfall, but again i NEVER said it was proof of anything, although how much does the weather have to change to “indicate” that something unusual is happening, before we should begin to worry? Whereever you look around the globe, changes in the oceans, the air, the climate, the weather, the rivers, extinction and migration of flora and fauna, all are indications. Is that a “silly” observation. But true, we cannot be sure that all these things add up to increasing evidence of CC and GW.
So, I’ll rely on the science to confirm my worries.

And maybe I should add that I was originally disagreeing with Write4U who was using weather as an evidence for GW (based on his experience of looking out of window and seeing his snowman to melt, or something like that). If you want to speculate how GW may be affecting the jet stream, I don’t really mind. I actually like it when people don’t sound like Data or Wikipedia all the time and are not afraid to indulge in conjectural thought (I copied that from a dictionary).

Maybe this is a good time to once again remember Sagan’s words of wisdom: “We will not be afraid to speculate, but we will be careful to distinguish speculation from fact.”

good on ya, George.

And that is false FrenchCurve.
Nowhere have I said that weather in a specific area as proof of climate change or GW.

My comment was to George in appreciation of his bringing out of of Sagan’s advice. Nothing to do with you. Sorry for confusion created.